absoluthal
New Member
where is yodobashi??
Tamron 17-50 f2.8
- Thread starter Xiao_shin
- Start date
- Status
where is yodobashi??
japan
I'm rather tempted to upgrade my Nikon 18-70mm to this Tamron 17-50 f2.8 and I'm wondering if the upgrade is justifiable. I have some questions to consider...
1. Which of these 2 lens autofocus faster? How about in low light?
2. How bad is the noise of the autofocusing motor? I used b4 a tamron 18-200 and found the noise rather unbearable after being so used to my nikon AF-S 18-70...
3. How is the sharpness of the tamron at f2.8? Is it as sharp or close to the nikon at f3.5?
I didn't consider the sigma version as the lens thread of the tamron is the same as the nikon. I'll then be able to re-use my nikon's UV and polarizer (which itself is already a sizeable investment).
1. Which of these 2 lens autofocus faster? How about in low light?
2. How bad is the noise of the autofocusing motor? I used b4 a tamron 18-200 and found the noise rather unbearable after being so used to my nikon AF-S 18-70...
3. How is the sharpness of the tamron at f2.8? Is it as sharp or close to the nikon at f3.5?
I didn't consider the sigma version as the lens thread of the tamron is the same as the nikon. I'll then be able to re-use my nikon's UV and polarizer (which itself is already a sizeable investment).
Used to have both lenses.
My own very personal opinion,
1. 18-70 autofocus faster. Slightly faster in low light
2. Tamron quite loud when focusing. People will notice. But not too loud. 18-70 silent in comparison
3. About the same at 2.8 for Tamron and 3.5 for Nikon
If this is the case, other than for the constant f2.8, there is no real good reason (for me) to upgrade my kit lens to this tamron as I really need a faster focusing and sharp lens for events.
Thanks for your reply!
actually I "upgraded" from my 18-70 kit to this 17-50. Quite fast for me. Didnt really compare the noise of AF, doesnt really bother me.
I did some shots during my company's teambuilding, i am quite happy with the speed and the quality.
Of course, sometimes, i miss the extra 20mm range.
YMMV
I did some shots during my company's teambuilding, i am quite happy with the speed and the quality.
Of course, sometimes, i miss the extra 20mm range.
YMMV
totally disagree that the tamron 17-50 2.8 and the kit lens at 3.5 are equivalent in terms of performance & IQ. I "upgraded" to the tamron 17-50 2.8 from the d80 18-135 kits lens which is also a 3.5 and can tell you that the picture quality is miles better with the 2.8
not sure about the sound etc as that does not bother me. AF is fast. And the 2.8 makes a helluva difference to indoor and low light shooting.
Cheers.
not sure about the sound etc as that does not bother me. AF is fast. And the 2.8 makes a helluva difference to indoor and low light shooting.
Cheers.
Stopped down the Tamron is way sharper than the Nikon at the other apertures. Just that at 2.8 I don't find it as sharp as it was at other apertures like 3.5 and above. It is very sharp at 5.6 and 8
Anyway you did ask about sharpness of both lenses at their widest. Take it what you will. Its only my opinion.
Bear in mind that QC varies for any lens. I used to have 2 copies of the 18-70. One was pretty bad, poor sharpness and all. The other was very good. Good contrast and good sharpness but still not as good as the Tamron outside of 2.8
Personally, if you dun mind the loudness and the slightly slower autofocus speed, I find the Tamron 17-50 to be a lot better than the Nikon 18-70. I find a certain 3Dness to the pictures it produce.
Go get it!
As i require my kit len's range for events like church and company events, the "eehh..eehh" sound of the autofocusing is quite distracting and rude to ppl around me. And i require a fast autofocus as my subjects WILL NOT wait for me...
If my main type of subject of my photography is still objects like scenary or abstracts, I would definately go for the tamron as the noise and slightly slower autofocus will not bother me at all. However, I often shoot events and I'm very used to the silent and quick AF-S of my 18-70mm. I don't think i can give them up for a f2.8 lens.
I think the best lens dat suits me is the uber expensive nikon 17-55........which I can't afford now.
If my main type of subject of my photography is still objects like scenary or abstracts, I would definately go for the tamron as the noise and slightly slower autofocus will not bother me at all. However, I often shoot events and I'm very used to the silent and quick AF-S of my 18-70mm. I don't think i can give them up for a f2.8 lens.
I think the best lens dat suits me is the uber expensive nikon 17-55........which I can't afford now.
As i require my kit len's range for events like church and company events, the "eehh..eehh" sound of the autofocusing is quite distracting and rude to ppl around me. And i require a fast autofocus as my subjects WILL NOT wait for me...
If my main type of subject of my photography is still objects like scenary or abstracts, I would definately go for the tamron as the noise and slightly slower autofocus will not bother me at all. However, I often shoot events and I'm very used to the silent and quick AF-S of my 18-70mm. I don't think i can give them up for a f2.8 lens.
I think the best lens dat suits me is the uber expensive nikon 17-55........which I can't afford now.
Actually if your main concern is autofocus speed and low light capability, you might consider getting a second hand Nikon D1h. This machine has such a strong motor that it will take charge of any lens, AFS or not. It also has very good high iso.
Anyway, that's what I've read so don't shoot the messenger.
Of course it is only 2.7mp but it is enough if you know what you are doing.
Anyway off-topic liao.
Haha! Thanks for the advice but I can't settle for a 2.7mp DSLR...
My client will kill me! Anyway I will stick to my kit lens for the time being and invest in a good flash.If you need more reach, go for the Sigma. Do note that the Sigma is still a variable aperture lens, whereas the Tamron maintains a constant f/2.8 throughout its zoom range.
If you are fine with the focal length of the kit lens, go for the Tamron.
i having the same prob... Sigma 17-70 vs Tamron 17-50
was wondering... wad are the pro and cons of this two len ...
does tamron give fast focusing? good sharpness?
does sigma give fast focusing? good sharpness?
guys do help me
thank
was wondering... wad are the pro and cons of this two len ...
does tamron give fast focusing? good sharpness?
does sigma give fast focusing? good sharpness?
guys do help me
thank
FilterFunk
Senior Member
it is hard to determine what is fast. some perceive USM/HSM to be fast, some think the ordinary micro motors from lens are fast.
similarly, sharpness is only determined by the end user. different people have different standards of what is considered as 'sharp' to them. with that said, go to the shop and test if for yourself.
similarly, sharpness is only determined by the end user. different people have different standards of what is considered as 'sharp' to them. with that said, go to the shop and test if for yourself.
the tamron at f2.8 is sharper than the nikon lens at f3.5? not true la... only the imagination at play.
i've tried it and it's a really nice lens for the price.
the f2.8 does help in low light.
contrast is good.
the tamron is generally sharp if stopped down a stop or two.
i've tried it and it's a really nice lens for the price.
the f2.8 does help in low light.
contrast is good.
the tamron is generally sharp if stopped down a stop or two.
i having the same prob... Sigma 17-70 vs Tamron 17-50
was wondering... wad are the pro and cons of this two len ...
does tamron give fast focusing? good sharpness?
does sigma give fast focusing? good sharpness?
guys do help me
thank
I am a newbie here. Hope this link will help a bit.
Can also use the search on Google very useful.
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1031&message=20285404&changemode=1
I do not have both lens.
But, i have the same problem as you for my next purchase lens.
I have been reading a few review on both lens.
I come by to the end if you want more RANGE got Sigma.
If you need more on SHARPNESS got Tamron.
For me i will get Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 for ::
1. Sharpness ( close as EFS 17-55 f/2.8 BUT without IS)
2. Good on low-light. (still dun not have $$$ to buy a good set of flash yet :sweat
3. Good for Both indoor and outdoor.
4. Affordable
5. Can't afford to get 17-55mm f/2.8. :sweatsm:
That all.
- Status
Similar threads
